Forum:Changing the Language Policy
Voting Support #I vote that we allow swearing if it is used in a non hostile conversation for example "Thats fucking amazing". See my post below for more info. N7 15:35, April 27, 2011 (UTC) #I vote that we should be allowed to say certain words depending on the context that they are used in. Ex) "Oh crap, I forgot" or "You're such a nerd." 10:43, April 27, 2011 (UTC) # I support a relaxation of the rules, still the personal insults or something like that must be regulated and punished--Changonauta 17:14, April 27, 2011 (UTC) # I support. Honestly, it's getting on my nervs, and you've ruined the site for me, admins especially. It's obvioous abuse by adminstrators who cry over the word moron, which was directed at a vandal.-- 07:23, April 28, 2011 (UTC) Neutral #The language policy is fine as written, and I don't see a proposed alternative. What am I voting for?JakePT 04:31, April 28, 2011 (UTC) #I have no issue with the language policy, the manner in which it is enforced could be laxed some, however there is a lack of clarity in this proposal. The Illusive Man 15:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC) Oppose #Currently, no specific changes to the language policy have been submitted by the proposer. If this is an effort to remove the language policy, I will also oppose it. -- Commdor (Talk) 15:23, April 27, 2011 (UTC) #The Policy isn't the issue in my opinion. It's how it is being enforced. No changes needed. --Humans Vanish 15:25, April 27, 2011 (UTC) #Same here, it's more an issue of how the rules are enforced. While I agree the implementation is sporadic at best, and there needs to be slightly more leniency in what words can be used, the majority of obscenities are still offensive to most people. So I oppose the change. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 16:09, April 27, 2011 (UTC) #This is something, that if it were to be changed, would need to be very specific about what needs to be changed. Right now there is nothing proposed and I see absolutely no reason to change it at the present time. Lancer1289 16:39, April 27, 2011 (UTC) #I don't see any alternative policy or solution. However, even if I personally do not use any of those offensive words, there could probably be some leeway in certain words. — Teugene (Talk) 16:41, April 27, 2011 (UTC) #Same as above.--Legionwrex 20:29, April 27, 2011 (UTC) #Several reasons: First, there's no policy to vote for or against. It's an opinion, followed by places to vote. The original poster needs to seriously rework the proposal (i.e. make a proposal in the first place). Second, the language policy exists for a very good reason: To create a welcoming environment for as many people as possible. All that is asked is a modicum of civility and restraint from some users to make the wiki welcoming for all. SpartHawg948 06:06, April 28, 2011 (UTC) # This doesn't really need to change, I see no problem with it, and it is there for a reason if you cannot have a civil conversation without cursing then I feel for you.--The Shadow User 07:26, April 28, 2011 (UTC)The Shadow User #I'm against any changes in the language policy.--First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. 10:57, April 28, 2011 (UTC) Discussion So, what exactly are we changing the language policy to? Or is this just an effort to remove the policy altogether? -- Commdor (Talk) 15:23, April 27, 2011 (UTC) There is language here some readers may find offensive I was going to write this up my self but you beat me to it. This wiki is a community site for a mature rated game and therefore technically it is aimed at people over 15. We all know that isn't true but if people under 15 are allowed to play the game they're mature enough to visit this site. I agree things like "Fuck you", "You nigger" "Fucking idiot" "Stupid Cunt" etc shouldn't be allowed because that is aimed directly at a person and I do deem that as offensive but I think if someone says "Thats fucking amazing" "Aww crap double post" "I think Cerberus are making up bullshit" is fine because its not aimed at anyone and is a way of showing peoples feelings easier. I also think that calling someone a "Geek" or a "nerd" does not need a message from an admin saying "Mind your language". So as you can see I support a change to the policy specificly the use of swear words in a non hostile conversation. --N7 15:35, April 27, 2011 (UTC) :You'll have to ask the proposer to include this or allow you to represent him if you want it to be the subject of this discussion. Right now the policy we're voting on is in the purple box. But for the record, I see zero reason to use any such expletives in polite conversation. "Geek", "nerd", "hell", "crap" and so on are fine, I don't regard those as vulgarities, but cursing for no other reason than to curse is absolutely ludicrous. It's really not that hard to say what you're trying to say without such words. -- Commdor (Talk) 15:56, April 27, 2011 (UTC) Thats what is important about free speech (not saying it pertains to here), it's not up to you what is offensive to everyone else. There are people who would find 'Hell' just as offensive as 'Fuck'. There's a thin-line. Therefore, in the U.S. at least, we let everyone say what they want because of the fact that everyone is different. Therefore the policy should remain the same but should be carried out with more thought and care. --Humans Vanish 16:09, April 27, 2011 (UTC) :In addition, euphemisms could be used as substitutes for direct vulgarism. An example: rather than saying "bullshit" one could say "that's a load of bull" or "bull"; or "crock of shit" could be said as "This is a crock". I personally don't have much of a problem with minor obscenities like "ass", "hell", "crap"; but I do have big problems with the big words. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 16:16, April 27, 2011 (UTC) ::Exactly and while there are a few things I disagree with in it, it is a good point. There are so many other ways to say something without using those words or being offensive to others. Lancer1289 16:41, April 27, 2011 (UTC) It would also be particularly difficult to judge what exactly is a 'big word'. As more and more things become less Taboo in todays world (e.g. Homosexuality, Religious freedoms, Race and Sex equality etc), the views on such topics also change. Depending on the country, personal opinions and values. One could sufficiently argue BOTH ways for the word 'Shit'. Some would consider it obscene (interesting it is being said more and more on TV in America), others just silly. Also, correct me if I am wrong but, if an european child said 'bloody' wouldn't he get smacked in the mouth? America not so much. So we have to take all of this into consideration when enforcing the policy. Because of this, I believe it should remain broad in its description. The solution is in how it is enforced. Simple as that really. Hope this helps. --Humans Vanish 16:58, April 27, 2011 (UTC) :Just pointing out that if someone said "this was bloody fantastic" then I wouldn't do a thing about it. I know that in places where the English especially (from my experiences), but you could argue Europe as a whole, spent a lot of time, it is a very common occurrence and there are a few words in US English that mean something similar. Lancer1289 17:06, April 27, 2011 (UTC) ::Tullis would know that well since she is British. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 17:09, April 27, 2011 (UTC) ::I'm British and Bloody isn't considered a swear word along with Crap or Hell. --N7 18:40, April 27, 2011 (UTC) :::I'm well aware of those relaxed obscenities. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 19:05, April 27, 2011 (UTC) I just want to comment right quick: I see a couple of users voting against this "proposal" (such as it is) but stating that there is a problem, though with the interpretation and application of the policy as opposed to the policy itself. (Yes, Humans Vanish and H-Man Havoc, I'm referring to you!) I can respect that, and I see where you're coming from. It's definitely a valid concern. If you wish to see this addressed, I'd be more than happy to discuss it, hash it out, and see if we can't reach some mutually satisfactory and equitable agreement. This particular forum wouldn't really be the right venue, as we'd be sidetracking the ongoing discussion/vote, but perhaps another Policy Forum entry (one with a specific policy change in mind), or someone's talk page? SpartHawg948 06:11, April 28, 2011 (UTC) In my personal opinion, words such as "Hell, Damn, and Shit" are not that big a deal as long as they are not used in a manner to insult another being, however I do agree that "Fuck, Bitch, and Pussy" there is no reason to use such language in a mature conversation. Just my opinion though whatever happens I'll respect it. --The Shadow User 07:20, April 28, 2011 (UTC)The Shadow User You guys gotta think though, people are brought up differently, and I respect that. That's why we should be allowed to say what we want, just not directed at people, if they get insulted when pointed at the video game characters, weapons, etc., then they should just leave, as they are not mature. Hunter Zealot not signing in, cause me no wanna give you virus. @Hunter Zealot, I agree with you to some extent. Although I respectfully disagree, yes people are raised differently and we should respect that, but they should in turn respect use. Like I do curse quite a bit in RL but when I'm on here I am respectful and do not because it is asked of me not too, that is how you show respect and prove you are mature. --The Shadow User 07:36, April 28, 2011 (UTC)The Shadow User Outside of this wiki I, being Australian, have a pretty foul mouth, but I don't particularly have a problem with keeping this place relatively 'clean'. While I don't have an issue with it, evidently some people do, and I don't see what there is to gain by having an 'anything goes policy'. I also don't want to go all FCC and have some words that are Ok, some that aren't or a limit on how many times you can say each word, or some such nonsense. Basically I think the policy, as written, is fine: Where I think the issue lies is enforcement. That policy has been interpreted as no swear words or offensive language anywhere, which isn't what it says. Calling a vandal a moron in a blog post doesn't violate that policy, nor does saying, on a blog or talk page, that something (not another person) is 'crap'. It also needs to be noted that the Language policy seems to be getting confused with a policy on how to treat other users. Calling someone a nerd or a jerk isn't violating the Language policy, but it's still unacceptable to insult other users regardless of the words used. Loosening up the language policy isn't going to make that OK.JakePT 08:04, April 28, 2011 (UTC) :The funny thing is that, despite my being one of the foremost advocates (and enforcers) of the language policy, I too am extremely profane in my day-to-day life. It goes with the territory when you're in the military. The thing is, there's something else that goes with that territory, and that is being able to turn it off and tone the language down when in settings where it isn't appropriate. I'm (quite literally) not asking anyone else here to do anything that I don't already do myself. It's hard for me to not drop the F-bomb around here sometimes, with the nonsense I have to deal with from some people. Nobody here, of course, I'm more thinking of some of the blokes who've left hateful invectives on my talk page. :I'm also pleased that JakePT pointed out that changing the language policy will in no way impact people not being able to call others jerks, morons, nerds, or whatever, as that is governed under a separate policy. It's an important distinction to make, and I don't think I could have worder it any better than he did! SpartHawg948 08:14, April 28, 2011 (UTC) ::I'm also quite profane in real life, though not to the extent of my younger brother, who I call a "chain-swearer" because at times he will drop at least 3-4 F-bombs in a single sentence, particularly when he's pissed (example: "I can't f-ing work around here with you standing near the f-ing doorway, so GET THE F-K OUT!"; and some others). Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 10:52, April 28, 2011 (UTC) ---- This policy proposal has been rejected 4-2-9. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:22, May 5, 2011 (UTC)